Cultural appropriation: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Cultural appropriation (view source)

Revision as of 14:45, 28 August 2023

2,157 bytes added , 28 August 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,883

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{a|g|[[File:File:Ouroboros.png|450px|center|frameless]]}}In the neuroticist’s un-ending quest to find things about to be upset about on behalf of others, the wilder-eyed of our number have taken intellectual property, a cultural concept squarely rooted in the western intellectual tradition — yes, ''that'' western intellectual tradition, the one that ruined the natural world — egregiously misunderstood it, and then to misapplied it to cultural and linguistic situations that make sense to no one but — well, a [[libtard]].
+{{a|devil|{{image|Ouroboros|png|Culture eating itself, yesterday}}}}{{dpn|/ˈkʌlʧᵊrᵊl əˌprəʊprɪˈeɪʃᵊn/|n}}
+The inappropriate, [[problematic]] or unacknowledged adoption of elements of one culture by members of another. Some see it, we are told as an exploitative form of “cultural ''colonialism''”.
-As usual, this whole palaver is steeped in irony. It is amusing enough that “cultural appropriation” is, thus, ''in itself'' an act of cultural appropriation from the very western oppressors against whom it is usually used, but even better is it that ''this'', of all western intellectual traditions, should be the one the [[critical theory|critical theorists]] should latch on to, since property rights of any kind, let alone in abstract concepts like culture, were one of the more pernicious traditions western colonists imposed on their dominions.
+In the neuroticist’s unending quest to find things to be upset about, the wilder-eyed of our number have taken up [[intellectual property]], a cultural concept squarely rooted in the western intellectual tradition — yes, ''that'' western intellectual tradition: the one that colonised the planet and ruined the natural world — misunderstood and then misapplied it to cultural and linguistic situations in a way that makes no sense at all to anyone but — well, those paragons of the western intellectual tradition: the [[libtard]]<nowiki/>s.
-Segregating certain historical behaviours, and reserving them for sections of the community is profoundly illiberal — isn’t it? — and profligate — why waste good ideas? — and generally wounding to the cause of cultural education, progress, integration, and for that matter preservation.
+For “cultural appropriation” ''itself'' is a brazen act of cultural appropriation, from the very western oppressors against whom the charge is usually levelled. It is even more ironic that ''this'', of all western intellectual traditions, is the one to which [[critical theory|critical theorists]] should hitch their wagon, since it was with the very idea of “property rights” that colonialists subjugated their foreign dominions in the first place.
-There is no monopoly on good ideas.
+The idea that cultural practices are the sorts of things that can be stolen ''is itself an artefact of colonial exploitation''.
-Well, there wasn’t, until some capitalists invented that idea and — ironically — forgot to claim ownership in it.
+''There is no monopoly on good ideas.''
+Well, there wasn’t, until some capitalists invented a way of asserting monopoly rights over good ideas and — ironically — ''forgot to copyright it''.<ref>I know, I know, patent, not copyright: but patents only last for 15 years, and are really expensive to obtain, so we think a resourcefully unscrupulous colonialist would have contrived to copyright it instead.</ref>
+===It’s all about the memes, stupid===
+Now, even if you are minded to hoover up all the righteous, post-colonial angst — it seems to be the vogue right now — this preposterous idea is ''still'' a duffer, for it presumes that members of a culture own, or have some kind of moral right to control, their culture. This is to get things precisely backwards: we do not own our culture; our culture owns ''us''. ''It'' will decide where it spreads. We are but vessels.
+In the same way one can say it was not humans who domesticated wheat but vice versa,<ref>{{author|Yuval Noah Harari}}, {{Br|Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind}}, (2011).</ref> we should regard useful cultural artefacts as units of [[meme|memetic]] transmission, replicating themselves wherever they can find a suitable host. ''We'' are those hosts. (It is a pity the internet, er, ''appropriated'' {{author|Richard Dawkins}}’ coinage the “[[meme]]”, for it captures this idea perfectly.)
+The most resilient cultures are those whose memes replicate most freely, spreading their ideas into the brains of “aliens”, often displacing the cultural memes that were already there. That was pretty much what the colonials did. You know; ''colonising'' those brains with western ideas, like blankets, guns, governorship, property rights, denim, highway cops and cheeseburgers.
+The real concern for a culture ought not to be when disrespectful aliens are borrowing its ideas, but in the opposite case: when its own members are becoming infected with new alien ideas, displacing those of its own. That a culture should have any interest in controlling [[intellectual property]] — thereby artificially ''restraining'' the free movement of its ideas — is the perverse western idea.
+{{sa}}
+*[[Libtard]]
+*[[Evolution by natural selection]]
+{{ref}}